This domain serves as a reference point for examining how individuals and institutions maintain coherence, trust, and decision capacity under conditions where truth is contested, fragmented, or strategically disrupted.
Post-truth resilience is not the restoration of a single shared truth.
It emerges through repeated exposure to conflicting narratives, platform dynamics, incentive-driven amplification, and uncertainty in verification.
In such environments, resilience may take the form of maintaining decision function, preserving trust relations, and sustaining verification habits — even when certainty cannot be secured.
This site does not promote media literacy programs, platform reforms, or regulatory frameworks. It does not provide debunking services or fact-checking tools.
Its purpose is to mark a structural condition already forming across civic life, institutions, and digital infrastructures — often described as a cultural problem, rather than as an operational constraint.
This page is intentionally minimal.
It exists to ensure the term Post-Truth Resilience has a stable place to stand.
本網域作為一個參考標記，用於檢視：當「真實」被爭奪、碎裂， 或被策略性擾動時，個體與制度如何維持一致性、信任與決策能力。
「後真相韌性」並不等同於恢復單一、共同且穩固的真相。
它透過反覆遭遇互相衝突的敘事、平台動力、誘因導向的擴散機制， 以及驗證不確定性而浮現。
在這樣的環境中，韌性可能表現為：維持決策功能、保全信任關係、 延續驗證習慣——即使無法取得完全確定的結論。
本站不推廣媒體素養方案、平台改革或監管框架， 亦不提供辟謠服務或查核工具。
它的目的，是標示一種已在公共生活、制度與數位基礎設施中成形的結構性條件—— 而這個條件常被描述成文化問題，卻較少被視為一種運作限制。
本頁刻意維持極簡。
它存在，是為了確保 後真相韌性（Post-Truth Resilience） 這個詞能有一個穩定的立足點。